Given, not too many teams would fair well if you take away their starting two WRs, their starting TE, and their best starting CB to injury. But our lack of depth is very troubling.

We rarely groom or mold young players successfully in order for them to be the immediate backup. We pluck other teams scraps and then shove them onto the field, then wonder why they don't work out. Even worse, we're having to spend time developing a grooming guys that should not have to be developed so extensively. Vlad Ducasse, taken in the second round, should not require 3 years of development, maybe half a season...or maybe one year tops.

There's a 'strategy' at work here? What is it? I like how they say he's created a team in his image. I wonder if even he knows what his image of a team is. And how cute that he got an A on his college paper on building a team.

Didn't read it, but depth isn't the major issue with this team, it's that most of the starters aren't good.

I think many of our starters are good or average, but not one player other than Revis and maybe one or two others is any better than good. And, the instant we lose a "good" player we have to put in a complete scrub.

Didn't read it, but depth isn't the major issue with this team, it's that most of the pffense isn't good.

tanny has been too influenced by 2 defensive head coaches in the draft. they've drafted no rbs and 1 wr in the first 2 rounds since 2005. that's why this team has little offensive talent. the other reason is the qb they traded up for isn't good.

the team needs a balanced approach to football. no other team will succeed believing it can hand it off to shonn greene 25 times a game. the absurdity of this alone makes this exercise of posting and analysing rather fruitless. the 4th string rbs on half the teams would average more ypc than greene.